IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/jorgde/v9y2020i1d10.1186_s41469-020-00087-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

GitLab: work where you want, when you want

Author

Listed:
  • Prithwiraj Choudhury

    (Harvard Business School)

  • Kevin Crowston

    (Syracuse University)

  • Linus Dahlander

    (ESMT Berlin)

  • Marco S. Minervini

    (INSEAD Business School)

  • Sumita Raghuram

    (San Jose State University)

Abstract

GitLab is a software company that works “all remote” at the scale of more than 1000 employees located in more than 60 countries. GitLab has no physical office and its employees can work from anywhere they choose. Any step of the organizational life of a GitLab employee (e.g., hiring, onboarding and firing) is performed remotely, except for a yearly companywide gathering. GitLab strongly relies on asynchronous coordination, allowing employees to work anytime they want. After highlighting some of the main practices implemented by GitLab to effectively work all remotely and asynchronously, I asked renowned organizational scientists their thoughts on this interesting case and to question the generalizability of the all remote asynchronous model. Understanding whether and under what conditions this model can succeed can be of guidance for organizational designers that are now considering different remote models in response of the COVID-19 shock and its aftermath.

Suggested Citation

  • Prithwiraj Choudhury & Kevin Crowston & Linus Dahlander & Marco S. Minervini & Sumita Raghuram, 2020. "GitLab: work where you want, when you want," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 9(1), pages 1-17, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:jorgde:v:9:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1186_s41469-020-00087-8
    DOI: 10.1186/s41469-020-00087-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1186/s41469-020-00087-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1186/s41469-020-00087-8?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David Card & Alexandre Mas & Enrico Moretti & Emmanuel Saez, 2012. "Inequality at Work: The Effect of Peer Salaries on Job Satisfaction," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(6), pages 2981-3003, October.
    2. Nicholas Bloom & James Liang & John Roberts & Zhichun Jenny Ying, 2015. "Does Working from Home Work? Evidence from a Chinese Experiment," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 130(1), pages 165-218.
    3. Julien Clement & Phanish Puranam, 2018. "Searching for Structure: Formal Organization Design as a Guide to Network Evolution," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(8), pages 3879-3895, August.
    4. Leung, Kwok & Zhu, Yongxin & Ge, Cungen, 2009. "Compensation disparity between locals and expatriates: Moderating the effects of perceived injustice in foreign multinationals in China," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 85-93, January.
    5. Forrest Briscoe, 2007. "From Iron Cage to Iron Shield? How Bureaucracy Enables Temporal Flexibility for Professional Service Workers," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(2), pages 297-314, April.
    6. Jared Nai & Reddi Kotha & Jayanth Narayanan & Phanish Puranam, 2020. "Transparency and Fairness in Organizational Decisions: An Experimental Investigation Using the Paired Ultimatum Game," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(1), pages 55-70, March.
    7. Lanaj, Klodiana & Johnson, Russell E. & Barnes, Christopher M., 2014. "Beginning the workday yet already depleted? Consequences of late-night smartphone use and sleep," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 124(1), pages 11-23.
    8. Kannan Srikanth & Phanish Puranam, 2014. "The Firm as a Coordination System: Evidence from Software Services Offshoring," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(4), pages 1253-1271, August.
    9. Holly Barcus, 2004. "Urban-Rural Migration in the USA: An Analysis of Residential Satisfaction," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(6), pages 643-657.
    10. Henry Sauermann & Wesley M. Cohen, 2010. "What Makes Them Tick? Employee Motives and Firm Innovation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(12), pages 2134-2153, December.
    11. Caroline A. Bartel & Amy Wrzesniewski & Batia M. Wiesenfeld, 2012. "Knowing Where You Stand: Physical Isolation, Perceived Respect, and Organizational Identification Among Virtual Employees," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(3), pages 743-757, June.
    12. Linus Dahlander & Siobhan O'Mahony, 2011. "Progressing to the Center: Coordinating Project Work," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(4), pages 961-979, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Phanish Puranam, 2022. "Deflating the rhetoric around “flat firms”," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 11(1), pages 15-17, March.
    2. Oliver Alexy, 2022. "How flat can it get? From better at flatter to the promise of the decentralized, boundaryless organization," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 11(1), pages 31-36, March.
    3. Iwona Oleniuch, 2021. "Employees' Perception of the Difficulties of Work at Home from the Perspective of their Experience on Remote Working," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(4), pages 781-796.
    4. Srdana Taboroši & Jasmina Poštin & Edit Terek Stojanović & Jelena Rajković Avdija & Nemanja Berber & Milan Nikolić, 2023. "The Influence of Cultural and Personal Properties on Job Performances and Organizational Commitment in Teleworkers," South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Sciendo, vol. 18(2), pages 1-20, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Prithwiraj (Raj) Choudhury & Cirrus Foroughi & Barbara Larson, 2021. "Work‐from‐anywhere: The productivity effects of geographic flexibility," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(4), pages 655-683, April.
    2. Eliot L. Sherman, 2020. "Discretionary Remote Working Helps Mothers Without Harming Non-mothers: Evidence from a Field Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(3), pages 1351-1374, March.
    3. Gans, Joshua S. & Murray, Fiona E. & Stern, Scott, 2017. "Contracting over the disclosure of scientific knowledge: Intellectual property and academic publication," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(4), pages 820-835.
    4. Becker, Markus C. & Rullani, Francesco & Zirpoli, Francesco, 2021. "The role of digital artefacts in early stages of distributed innovation processes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(10).
    5. Bachtal, Yassien, 2021. "Work organization and work psychology theories in the context of Work from Home – A literature-based overview," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 128563, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    6. Michał T. Tomczak & Elias Mpofu & Nathan Hutson, 2022. "Remote Work Support Needs of Employees with Autism Spectrum Disorder in Poland: Perspectives of Individuals with Autism and Their Coworkers," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(17), pages 1-13, September.
    7. Chen, Chen & Chen, Yangyang & Hsu, Po-Hsuan & Podolski, Edward J., 2016. "Be nice to your innovators: Employee treatment and corporate innovation performance," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 78-98.
    8. Liu, Baohua & Sun, Pei-Yu & Zeng, Yongliang, 2020. "Employee-related corporate social responsibilities and corporate innovation: Evidence from China," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 357-372.
    9. Simisola Johnson, 2022. "Women deserve better: A discussion on COVID‐19 and the gendered organization in the new economy," Gender, Work and Organization, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(2), pages 639-649, March.
    10. Alfred Michael Dockery & Sherry Bawa, 2014. "Is working from home good or bad work? Evidence from Australian employees," Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre Working Paper series WP1402, Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre (BCEC), Curtin Business School.
    11. Francesco Capozza & Ingar Haaland & Christopher Roth & Johannes Wohlfart, 2021. "Studying Information Acquisition in the Field: A Practical Guide and Review," CEBI working paper series 21-15, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics. The Center for Economic Behavior and Inequality (CEBI).
    12. Cardoso, Ana Rute, 2012. "Money and rank in the labor market," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 115(2), pages 325-328.
    13. Yamada, Katsunori & Sato, Masayuki, 2013. "Another avenue for anatomy of income comparisons: Evidence from hypothetical choice experiments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 35-57.
    14. Thorvaldur Gylfason, 2019. "Inequality Undermines Democracy and Growth," CESifo Working Paper Series 7486, CESifo.
    15. Amrei Lahno & Marta Serra-Garcia, 2015. "Peer effects in risk taking: Envy or conformity?," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 50(1), pages 73-95, February.
    16. Claudia Hupkau & Barbara Petrongolo, 2020. "Work, Care and Gender during the COVID‐19 Crisis," Fiscal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(3), pages 623-651, September.
    17. Yadong Luo & Huan Zhang & Juan Bu, 2019. "Developed country MNEs investing in developing economies: Progress and prospect," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 50(4), pages 633-667, June.
    18. Hoffman, Mitchell & Burks, Stephen V., 2017. "Worker Overconfidence: Field Evidence and Implications for Employee Turnover and Returns from Training," IZA Discussion Papers 10794, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    19. Guido Friebel & Matthias Heinz & Miriam Krueger & Nikolay Zubanov, 2017. "Team Incentives and Performance: Evidence from a Retail Chain," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(8), pages 2168-2203, August.
    20. Ro’i Zultan & Eldar Dadon, 2023. "Missing the forest for the trees: when monitoring quantitative measures distorts task prioritization," Working Papers 2319, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Department of Economics.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:jorgde:v:9:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1186_s41469-020-00087-8. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.